f3ba916e8b5b5ee2a381cef38882671eadb231df lint: ignore gitian keys file for spelling linter (Sebastian Falbesoner)
da289a6c4a0a5e110e301f34f1db57b6d31bcdcc lint: update list of spelling linter false positives (Sebastian Falbesoner)
a0022f1cfbb3d8f1f8f3ff135f854be0cb89643f test: bump codespell linter version to 2.0.0 (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This small patch updates the ignore list for the spelling linter script (which uses `codespell`), both removing false-positives that are not relevant anymore and adding new ones. As [suggested by jonatack](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20762#issuecomment-750889701)~~, whose last name is now also part of the list :)~~. Also changed the linter script to not check the gitian keys file, as [suggested by hebasto](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20817#discussion_r550763409). The codespell version used is bumped to most recent version 2.0.0, which is more aware of some terms that were previously needed in the ignorelist for v1.17.1, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20817#issuecomment-753428669.
Running spelling linter on master branch (repeated findings in the same file are removed to keep the output short):
```
$ ./test/lint/lint-spelling.sh
contrib/gitian-keys/keys.txt:16: Atack ==> Attack
doc/developer-notes.md:1284: inout ==> input, in out
doc/psbt.md:122: Asend ==> Ascend, as end
src/bench/verify_script.cpp:27: Keypair ==> Key pair
src/blockencodings.h:30: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/compressor.h:65: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/core_read.cpp:131: presense ==> presence
src/index/disktxpos.h:21: blockIn ==> blocking
src/net_processing.h:67: anounce ==> announce
src/netaddress.h:486: compatiblity ==> compatibility
src/primitives/transaction.h:35: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/qt/bitcoinunits.cpp:101: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/rpc/blockchain.cpp:2150: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/rpc/misc.cpp:198: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/bitcoinconsensus.cpp:81: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/bitcoinconsensus.h:63: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/interpreter.cpp:1279: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/interpreter.h:222: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/sign.cpp:17: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/script/sign.h:39: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/serialize.h:181: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/signet.cpp:142: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/test/base32_tests.cpp:17: fo ==> of, for
src/test/base64_tests.cpp:17: fo ==> of, for
src/test/script_tests.cpp:1509: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/test/sighash_tests.cpp:27: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/test/validation_tests.cpp:78: excercise ==> exercise
src/undo.h:36: Unser ==> Under, unset, unsure, user
src/validation.cpp:1403: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/validation.h:255: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/wallet/wallet.cpp:1532: nIn ==> inn, min, bin, nine
src/wallet/walletdb.cpp:429: Crypted ==> Encrypted
test/functional/feature_nulldummy.py:63: unnecssary ==> unnecessary
test/functional/wallet_encryption.py:81: crypted ==> encrypted
test/functional/wallet_upgradewallet.py:36: fpr ==> for, far, fps
^ Warning: codespell identified likely spelling errors. Any false positives? Add them to the list of ignored words in test/lint/lint-spelling.ignore-words.txt
```
Running spelling linter on PR branch:
```
$ ./test/lint/lint-spelling.sh
src/core_read.cpp:131: presense ==> presence
src/net_processing.h:67: anounce ==> announce
src/netaddress.h:486: compatiblity ==> compatibility
src/test/validation_tests.cpp:78: excercise ==> exercise
src/wallet/walletdb.cpp:429: Crypted ==> Encrypted
test/functional/feature_nulldummy.py:63: unnecssary ==> unnecessary
test/functional/wallet_encryption.py:81: crypted ==> encrypted
^ Warning: codespell identified likely spelling errors. Any false positives? Add them to the list of ignored words in test/lint/lint-spelling.ignore-words.txt
```
This list of remaining findings doesn't contain false positives anymore -- the typos are fixed in PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20762.
Happy new year! 🍾
ACKs for top commit:
hebasto:
re-ACK f3ba916e8b5b5ee2a381cef38882671eadb231df, only suggested changes since my [previous](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20817#pullrequestreview-560632881) review.
jonatack:
ACK f3ba916e8b5b5ee2a381cef38882671eadb231df I don't know if there are any particular issues with bumping codespell to v2.0.0, but locally running the spelling linter and the cirrus job at https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5004066998714368 both LGTM. Thanks for also verifying and removing the unused words from the ignore list.
Tree-SHA512: e92ae6f16c01d4ff3d54f8c3a0ee95e12741f7bfe031d307a785f5cfd8a80525b16b34275f413b914c4a318f5166f9887399c21f2dad9cc7e9be41647042ef37
3e1571285f4a0edf59d51bbdeee028be3038b6dc Update TSan suppressions (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
It seems possible now to drop some TSan suppressions.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 94518fd2f3a7168b2989424de0696e42c8f509b833aafbc7e75f4c1180a0b8d9a47f43c50d06b03b26a924643afe86274b2062c9d456c17a68576d19566ed66f
3c2478c38522c176e81befd4d991a259b09be063 ci: Print COMMIT_RANGE to the log as it was in Travis CI (Hennadii Stepanov)
c123892c2e47e3706f06820aba2454d494a39564 ci: Drop Travis-specific workaround for shellcheck (Hennadii Stepanov)
10af252d97532843b26505d215f6e975f4b21672 ci: Drop Travis-specific way to set COMMIT_RANGE variable (Hennadii Stepanov)
93504da3a932f33126545ebc9383f695a6efe51e ci: Fix COMMIT_RANGE variable value for PRs (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
This PR:
- is a #20658 and #20682 followup
- set the `COMMIT_RANGE` variable correctly for PRs
- cleans up Travis-specific code
- prints COMMIT_RANGE value to the log for convenience as it was in Travis CI
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 3c2478c38522c176e81befd4d991a259b09be063
Tree-SHA512: beb933352b10fd5eb3e66373ddb62439e4f3a03b50fb037ee89fa92c0706cec41d05f2d307f15bb18d1e634e6464f4e123b7e2f88703c8edfd145d8d6eff0b1a
95487b055328b590ba83f258de9637ab0f9a2f17 doc: Drop mentions of Travis CI as it is no longer used (Hennadii Stepanov)
09d105ef0f8b4b06bf248721a1209c9e16e9db75 ci: Drop travis_fold feature as Travis CI is no longer used (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
As Travis CI is no longer used, this PR:
- drops `travis_fold` feature
- drops mentions of Travis CI in docs
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 95487b055328b590ba83f258de9637ab0f9a2f17
Tree-SHA512: 2e259bb8b1e37bcefc1251737bb2716f06ddb57c490010b373825c4e70f42ca38efae69a2f63f21f577d7cee3725b94097bdddbd313f8ebf499281cf97c53cef
815e4f8026 masternode: protect m_{error,state} with cs (pasta)
136e445abc refactor: pass CActiveMasternodeManager as pointer arg to LLMQContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
5e0f77747a refactor: pass CActiveMasternodeManager as pointer arg to CJContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
f171c24a29 refactor: add CActiveMasternodeManager NodeContext alias, use in RPC (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
44beb941cb refactor: prefix member variable names with m_ (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
73cef4f5f9 refactor: make bls{Pub}KeyOperator member variables instead of pointers (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
fbc783635a refactor: make m_info private, get const refs (or copies) from Get*() functions (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
1b516ce4ed refactor: use signing helper function instead of passing blsKeyOperator (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
33702aca39 refactor: add helper function to decrypt messages with blsKeyOperator (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
3eb931b596 refactor: add helper function to sign messages with blsKeyOperator (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
3827355cce refactor: move key initialization to InitKeys, define destructor (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
e5295dec1f refactor: move activeMasternodeInfo{Cs} into CActiveMasternodeManager (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
b8c1f010e7 refactor: avoid accessing active masternode info if not in masternode mode (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
9a3c5a3c48 trivial: access activeMasternodeInfo when lock is in scope (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
* `CActiveMasternodeManager`, unlike other managers, is _conditionally_ initialized (specifically, when the node is hosting a masternode). This means that checks need to be made to ensure that the conditions needed to initialize the manager are true or that the pointer leads to a valid manager instance.
As the codebase currently checks (and fast-fails) based on the node being in "masternode mode" (`fMasternodeMode`) or not, we will continue with this approach, but with additional assertions _after_ the masternode mode check if the manager exists.
* Though, since `activeMasternodeInfo`(`Cs`) are global variables, they can be accessed _regardless_ of whether the corresponding manager exists. This means some parts of the codebase attempt to fetch information about the (nonexistent) active masternode _before_ determining if it should use the masternode mode path or not (looking at you, `CMNAuth::ProcessMessage`)
Moving them into `CActiveMasternodeManager` meant adding checks _before_ attempting to access information about the masternode, as they would no longer be accessible with dummy values ([here](2110c0c309/src/init.cpp (L1633-L1635))) on account of being part of the conditionally initialized manager.
* In an attempt to opportunistically dereference the manager, `CDKGSessionManager` (accepting a pointer) was dereferencing the manager before passing it to `CDKGSessionHandler`. This was done under the assumption that `CDKGSessionManager` would only ever be initialized in masternode mode.
This is not true. I can confirm that because I spent a few days trying to debug test failures. `CDKGSessionHandler` is initialized in two scenarios:
* In masternode mode
* If the `-watchquorums` flag is enabled
The latter scenario doesn't initialize `CActiveMasternodeManager`.
Furthermore, the DKG round thread is started unconditionally ([here](2110c0c309/src/llmq/context.cpp (L79))) and the `CDKGSessionHandler::StartThreads` > `CDKGSessionHandler::StartThread` > `CDKGSessionHandler::PhaseHandlerThread` > `CDKGSessionHandler::HandleDKGRound` > `CDKGSessionHandler::InitNewQuorum` > `CActiveMasternodeManager::GetProTxHash` call chain reveals an attempt to fetch active masternode information without any masternode mode checks.
This behaviour has now been changed and the thread will only be spun up if in masternode mode.
* Dereferencing so far has been limited to objects that primarily hold data (like `CCoinJoinBroadcastTx` or `CGovernanceObject`) as they should not have knowledge of node's state (that responsibility lies with whatever manager manipulates those objects), perform one-off operations and static functions.
* `activeMasternodeInfo` allowed its members to be read-write accessible to anybody who asked. Additionally, signing and decrypting involved borrowing the operator secret key from the active masternode state to perform those operations.
This behaviour has now been changed. The internal state is now private and accessible read-only as a const ref (or copy) and `Decrypt`/`Sign` functions have been implemented to allow those operations to happen without having another manager access the operator private key in order to do so.
* You cannot combine a `WITH_LOCK` and an `Assert` (in either mutex or accessed value), doing so will cause errors if `-Werror=thread-safety` is enabled. This is why `assert`s are added even when it would intuitively seem that `Assert` would've been more appropriate to use.
## Future Considerations
Currently there are no unit tests that test the functionality of `CActiveMasternodeManager` as it's never initialized in test contexts, breakage had to be found using functional tests. Perhaps some (rudimentary) tests for `CActiveMasternodeManager` may prove to be valuable.
## Breaking Changes
Not _really_. Some behaviour has been modified but nothing that should necessitate updates or upgrades.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 815e4f8026
Tree-SHA512: cbe49ea9e1c35df514e1b40869ee271baef1c348c9d09e4b356e5fc8fe5449cbbe66569258f2d664029faa9a46f711df9bf9e41eb8734c3aefc6cd8e94378948
d5d1a714fb Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#24390: test: Remove suppression no longer needed with headers-only Boost.Test (fanquake)
51630d2e5e Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22824: refactor: remove RecursiveMutex cs_nBlockSequenceId (MarcoFalke)
a9b1575fe8 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22781: wallet: fix the behavior of IsHDEnabled, return false in case of a blank hd wallet. (Samuel Dobson)
0505229c89 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22327: cli: Avoid truncating -rpcwaittimeout (MarcoFalke)
1dc97c7679 Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22149: test: Add temporary logging to debug #20975 (W. J. van der Laan)
44f91cbc9a Merge #21597: test: Document race:validation_chainstatemanager_tests suppression (fanquake)
c326830f48 Merge bitcoin-core/gui#243: fix issue when disabling the auto-enabled blank wallet checkbox (MarcoFalke)
267f42fd6a Merge #21382: build: Clean remnants of QTBUG-34748 fix (fanquake)
1fcc5f1101 Merge #20540: test: Fix wallet_multiwallet issue on windows (MarcoFalke)
4afbaf2ea1 Merge #20322: test: Fix intermittent issue in wallet_listsinceblock (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Batch of backports
## What was done?
Trivial batch of backports
## How Has This Been Tested?
CI looks good
## Breaking Changes
None
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: 8eeac54f011eb1111888c745dd56184ac9601de290f2b0f7b7ad02240e8dc1cab5a47fed26bfed2bd6f1066e0710827a3e5b2426f0bf66821cf1cd09099d5160
81738d2881253f28b69666ada2a01ebb353f503a test: Remove suppression no longer needed with headers-only Boost.Test (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
It appears, that moving to [headers-only](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24301) Boost.Test makes the removed suppression unneeded even without [bumping](https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/24383) boost version.
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
cr ACK 81738d2881253f28b69666ada2a01ebb353f503a
Tree-SHA512: e60443f79a2e38cc78fceeff5c2956d622e8a10730129f9c27c14aef59bc6fa0894b8011e6191530443bf3165f78da978bc08ad04248ddb65e2da373264afa6a
faa94961d6e38392ba068381726ed4e033367b03 test: Add temporary logging to debug #20975 (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
to be reverted after a fix
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK faa94961d6
Tree-SHA512: 1f3103fcf4cad0af54e26c4d257bd824b128b5f2d2b81c302e861a829fd55d6a099fa476b79b30a71fe98975ae604b9e3ff31fd48a51d442389a9bd515e60ba0
fada2dfcac1c4b47ee76b877d91d515cf1d36410 test: Fix wallet_multiwallet issue on windows (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
The error message on windows:
> 2020-11-30T18:10:47.536032Z ListWalletDir: Error scanning C:\Users\user\AppData\Local\Temp\test_runner_₿_🏃_20201130_181042\wallet_multiwallet_0\node0\regtest\wallets\self_walletdat_symlink: boost::filesystem::status: The name of the file cannot be resolved by the system: "C:\Users\user\AppData\Local\Temp\test_runner_₿_🏃_20201130_181042\wallet_multiwallet_0\node0\regtest\wallets\self_walletdat_symlink\wallet.dat"
ACKs for top commit:
promag:
Code review ACK fada2dfcac1c4b47ee76b877d91d515cf1d36410. Although it could ignore (don't log) directories that lead to no permission error.
fanquake:
ACK fada2dfcac1c4b47ee76b877d91d515cf1d36410
Tree-SHA512: b475162cc3cd1574209d916605b229a79c8089714295f5e16569b71f958f0007d54dc76833938492d931387784588b11b73e3ef00f963540af42c079417f8d72
fa108d6a757838225179a8df942cfb6d99c98c90 test: update tests for peer discouragement (Jon Atack)
1a9f462caa63fa16d7b4415312d2032a42b3fe0b gui, doc: rm Ban Score in GUI Peers window/release notes updates (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is the third `-banscore` PR in the mini-series described in #19464. See that PR for the intention and reasoning.
- no longer display "Ban Score" in the GUI peers window and add a release note, plus release note fixups per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19464#pullrequestreview-447452052
- update tests (`src/test/denialofservice_tests.cpp` and `test/functional/p2p_leak.py`) from banning to discouragement and per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19464#issuecomment-658052518
ACKs for top commit:
jnewbery:
ACK fa108d6a757838225179a8df942cfb6d99c98c90
laanwj:
ACK fa108d6a757838225179a8df942cfb6d99c98c90
Tree-SHA512: 58a449b3f47b8cb5490b34e4442ee8675bfad1ce48af4e4fd5c67715b0c1a596fb8e731d42e576b4c3b64627f76e0a68cbb1da9ea9f588a5932fe119baf40d50
41d55d30579358c805036201664ad6a1c1d48681 doc: getpeerinfo banscore deprecation release note (Jon Atack)
dd54e3796e633cfdf6954af306afd26eadc25116 test: getpeerinfo banscore deprecation test (Jon Atack)
8c7647b3fbbab03ea84071cf3cd2d0d2bf8be255 rpc: deprecate banscore field in rpc getpeerinfo (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
Per https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19219#discussion_r443074487 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19219#issuecomment-652699592, this PR deprecates returning the `banscore` field in the `getpeerinfo` RPC, updates the help, adds a test, and updates the release notes. Related to #19464.
ACKs for top commit:
fanquake:
ACK 41d55d30579358c805036201664ad6a1c1d48681
Tree-SHA512: 8eca08332581e2fe191a2aafff6ba89ce39413f0491ed0de8b86577739f0ec430b1a8fbff2914b0f3138a229563dfcc1981c0cf5b7dd6061b5c48680a28423bc
bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb test: doc: improve doc for `from_hex` helper (mention `to_hex` alternative) (Sebastian Falbesoner)
191405420815d49ab50184513717a303fc2744d6 scripted-diff: test: rename `FromHex` to `from_hex` (Sebastian Falbesoner)
a79396fe5f8f81c78cf84117a87074c6ff6c9d95 test: remove `ToHex` helper, use .serialize().hex() instead (Sebastian Falbesoner)
2ce7b47958c4a10ba20dc86c011d71cda4b070a5 test: introduce `tx_from_hex` helper for tx deserialization (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
There are still many functional tests that perform conversions from a hex-string to a message object (deserialization) manually. This PR identifies all those instances and replaces them with a newly introduced helper `tx_from_hex`.
Instances were found via
* `git grep "deserialize.*BytesIO"`
and some of them manually, when it were not one-liners.
Further, the helper `ToHex` was removed and simply replaced by `.serialize().hex()`, since now both variants are in use (sometimes even within the same test) and using the helper doesn't really have an advantage in readability. (see discussion https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22257#discussion_r652404782)
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
review re-ACK bdb8b9a347e68f80a2e8d44ce5590a2e8214b6bb 😁
Tree-SHA512: e25d7dc85918de1d6755a5cea65471b07a743204c20ad1c2f71ff07ef48cc1b9ad3fe5f515c1efaba2b2e3d89384e7980380c5d81895f9826e2046808cd3266e
b9e76f1bf08c52fcd402b2314e00db4ad247ebc8 rpc: Add test for -rpcwaittimeout (Christian Decker)
f76cb10d7dc9a7b0c55d28011161606399417664 rpc: Prefix rpcwaittimeout error with details on its nature (Christian Decker)
c490e17ef698a1695050f82ef6567b3b87a21861 doc: Add release notes for the `-rpcwaittimeout` cli parameter (Christian Decker)
a7fcc8eb59fe51473571661316214156fbdbdcae rpc: Add a `-rpcwaittimeout` parameter to limit time spent waiting (Christian Decker)
Pull request description:
Adds a new numeric `-rpcwaittimeout` that can be used to limit the
time we spend waiting on the RPC server to appear. This is used by
downstream projects to provide a bit of slack when `bitcoind`s RPC
interface is not available right away.
This makes the `-rpcwait` argument more useful, since we can now limit
how long we'll ultimately wait, before potentially giving up and reporting
an error to the caller. It was discussed in the context of the BTCPayServer
wanting to have c-lightning wait for the RPC interface to become available
but still have the option of giving up eventually ([4355]).
I checked with laanwj whether this is already possible ([comment]), and
whether this would be a welcome change. Initially I intended to repurpose
the (optional) argument to `-rpcwait`, however I decided against it since it
would potentially break existing configurations, using things like `rpcwait=1`,
or `rpcwait=true` (the former would have an unintended short timeout, when
old behavior was to wait indefinitely).
~Due to its simplicity I didn't implement a test for it yet, but if that's desired I
can provide one.~ Test was added during reviews.
[4355]: https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning/issues/4355
[comment]: https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning/issues/4355#issuecomment-768288261
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK b9e76f1bf08c52fcd402b2314e00db4ad247ebc8
promag:
ACK b9e76f1bf08c52fcd402b2314e00db4ad247ebc8.
Tree-SHA512: 3cd6728038ec7ca7c35c2e7ccb213bfbe963f99a49bb48bbc1e511c4dd23d9957c04f9af1f8ec57120e47b26eaf580b46817b099d5fc5083c98da7aa92db8638
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
1f449586a9e39bc4fb53cb5c7a31362e47aea19b test: add `bad-txns-prevout-null` test to mempool_accept.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
aa0a5bb70d77739d43d5a9ceae78fb0c6fafd435 test: add `bad-txns-prevout-null` test case to invalid_txs.py (Sebastian Falbesoner)
Pull request description:
This simple PR adds missing tests for the reject reason `bad-txns-prevout-null`, which is thrown in the function `CheckTransaction()`: a62fc35a15/src/consensus/tx_check.cpp (L52-L54)
Basically this condition is met for non-coinbase transactions (the code snippet above only hits if `!tx.IsCoinBase()`) with coinbase-like outpoints, i.e. hash=0, n=0xffffffff.
Can be tested by running the functional tests `feature_block.py`, `p2p_invalid_tx.py` and `mempool_accept.py`. Not sure if the redundancy in the tests is desired (I guess it would make sense if the mempool acceptance test also makes use of the invalid_txs templates?).
ACKs for top commit:
rajarshimaitra:
tACK 1f449586a9
brunoerg:
tACK 1f449586a9e39bc4fb53cb5c7a31362e47aea19b
kristapsk:
ACK 1f449586a9e39bc4fb53cb5c7a31362e47aea19b, code looks correct and all tests pass.
Tree-SHA512: 2d4f940a6ac8e0d80d2670c9e1111cbf43ae6ac62809a2ccf17cffee9a41d387ea4d889ee300eb4a407c055b13bfa5d37102a32ed59964a9b6950bd907ba7204
5a6b8b6b1f partial Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#27053: wallet: reuse change dest when re-creating TX with avoidpartialspends (fanquake)
2f788aa76d fix: change port to use for zmq in interface_zmq_dash.py (Konstantin Akimov)
0ce66fd477 Merge #19507: Expand functional zmq transaction tests (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
a1c2386153 Merge #17445: zmq: Fix due to invalid argument and multiple notifiers (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
44929bad82 Merge #16404: qa: Test ZMQ notification after chain reorg (MarcoFalke)
1707f01309 fix: follow-up changes from bitcoin/bitcoin#22220 for maxapsfee (Konstantin Akimov)
eb4270deae Merge #19743: -maxapsfee follow-up (Samuel Dobson)
6a6d379711 Merge #19756: tests: add sync_all to fix race condition in wallet groups test (MarcoFalke)
5821a1d23a Merge #14582: wallet: always do avoid partial spends if fees are within a specified range (Samuel Dobson)
59d5a4ef39 Merge #19773: wallet: Avoid recursive lock in IsTrusted (Samuel Dobson)
2489f29f0e Merge #19830: test: Add tsan supp for leveldb::DBImpl::DeleteObsoleteFiles (fanquake)
10fa7a66b6 Merge #19538: ci: Add tsan suppression for race in DatabaseBatch (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Regular backports from bitcoin v21
## What was done?
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19538
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19830
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19773
- bitcoin/bitcoin#14582
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19756
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19743
- bitcoin/bitcoin#16404
- bitcoin/bitcoin#17445
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19507
- partial bitcoin/bitcoin#27053
+some extra fixes and missing changes from bitcoin/bitcoin#22220 for `maxapsfee`
+changed port for zmq in `interface_zmq_dash.py` to prevent intermittent error in `interface_zmq.py`
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit & functional tests
## Breaking Changes
`CreateTransaction` now uses sometime 2 private keys for one transaction instead one
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 5a6b8b6b1f
Tree-SHA512: 7efd8a31808f155c08035d0fb7ceaac369e3e44e68d2c91a88e52815a60efba5fe9458f41d93352627c2c062d414fb0207dcf216fa75b54af210b503f9123de6
c5031685bc fix: rename arguments for 'voteraw' (Konstantin Akimov)
3621966f12 feat: add todo to drop Throw() from rpc/util.h (Konstantin Akimov)
b54f03a0c1 fix: wrong name of argument for coinjoin (Konstantin Akimov)
d0163543d9 refactor: use new format CPCCommand for rpc/coinjoin (Konstantin Akimov)
0e1a31159f Merge #19994: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (net, rpcwallet) (MarcoFalke)
af9eb81e56 fix: wrong name of arguments for RPC (Konstantin Akimov)
c30c8f22dd Merge #19849: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (blockchain,rawtransaction) (MarcoFalke)
f525f574b0 fix: follow-up missing changes from Merge #18607: rpc: Fix named arguments in documentation (Konstantin Akimov)
7ac1ee0fb4 Merge #19717: rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining,zmq,rpcdump) (MarcoFalke)
860d31f504 Merge #19455: rpc generate: print useful help and error message (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
41c35fd8dc fix: adjust missing arguments and help for misc rpc: debug, echo, mnsync (Konstantin Akimov)
58d923cd5b Merge #19528: rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
This batch of backports asserts that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones.
## What was done?
done backports:
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19994
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19849
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19717
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19455
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19528
Beside that same changes are applied for src/coinjoin's rpc.
There's also applied multiple fixes for various rpcs for cases when RPCArg names are mismatched with CPCCommand
**Please, note, that this PR is not final fix for all RPCArgs**. There's a lot of dash's rpc that is not refactored that.
That it is not easy to implement for `quorum command` because the list of arguments (and even their numbers) are different for each sub-command. This fixes are out-of scope of this PR and should be done before bitcoin#18531 is backported.
See also relevant bitcoin#21035.
## How Has This Been Tested?
I used this helper to see which exactly args are specified wrongly:
```cpp
diff --git a/src/rpc/server.h b/src/rpc/server.h
index d4a7ba60eb..cdfd741f54 100644
--- a/src/rpc/server.h
+++ b/src/rpc/server.h
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
#include <string>
#include <univalue.h>
+#include <logging.h>
class CRPCCommand;
@@ -110,6 +111,19 @@ public:
fn().GetArgNames(),
intptr_t(fn))
{
+ if (fn().m_name != name_in || fn().GetArgNames() != args_in) {
+ std::cerr << "names: " << fn().m_name << ' ' << name_in << std::endl;
+ std::cerr << "arg names: " << fn().GetArgNames().size() << std::endl;
+ for (const auto& i : fn().GetArgNames()) {
+ std::cerr << "arg: " << i << std::endl;
+ }
+ std::cerr << "FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO FIASCO" << std::endl;
+ }
CHECK_NONFATAL(fn().m_name == name_in);
CHECK_NONFATAL(fn().GetArgNames() == args_in);
}
```
## Breaking Changes
N/A
Some arguments are renamed in RPC but they have been broken (used incorrect name not same as in docs)
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
(self)utACK c5031685bc
Tree-SHA512: e885a8f8fa8bc282dae092fe8df65a37e2ab6ca559cd0598d54bfc06cacddb3bd6f3c74fa2d9c1551f8a4fbdfdeabb8d065649df66d5809e792aec6f51d0df14
14b4921a91920df25b19ff420bfe2bff8c56f71e wallet: reuse change dest when recreating TX with avoidpartialspends (Matthew Zipkin)
Pull request description:
Closes https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/27051
When the wallet creates a transaction internally, it will also create an alternative that spends using destination groups and see if the fee difference is negligible. If it costs the user the same to send the grouped version, we send it (even if the user has `avoidpartialspends` set to `false` which is default). This patch ensures that the second transaction creation attempt re-uses the change destination selected by the first attempt. Otherwise, the first change address remains reserved, will not be used in the second attempt, and then will never be used by the wallet, leaving gaps in the BIP44 chain.
If the user had `avoidpartialspends` set to true, there is no second version of the created transaction and the change addresses are not affected.
I believe this behavior was introduced in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14582
ACKs for top commit:
achow101:
ACK 14b4921a91920df25b19ff420bfe2bff8c56f71e
Tree-SHA512: a3d56f251ff4b333fc11325f30d05513e34ab0a2eb703fadd0ad98d167ae074493df1a24068298336c6ed2da6b31aa2befa490bc790bbc260ed357c8f2397659
7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009 Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns (Gregory Sanders)
a0f4f9c983e57cc97ecbc56d0177eaf1854c842c Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg (Gregory Sanders)
2399a0600ca9c4b676fa2f97520b8ecc44642246 Add test case for mempool->block zmq notification (Gregory Sanders)
e70512a83c69bc85e96b08ade725594eda3e230f Make ordering of zmq consumption irrelevant to functional test (Gregory Sanders)
Pull request description:
Tests written to better define what messages are sent when. Also did a bit of refactoring to make sure the exact notification channel ordering doesn't matter.
Confusions below aside, I believe having these more descriptive tests helps describe what behavior we expect from ZMQ notificaitons.
Remaining confusion:
1) Notification patterns seem to vary wildly with the inclusion of mempool transactions being reorg'ed. See difference between "Add zmq test for transaction pub during reorg" and "Have zmq reorg test cover mempool txns" commits for specifics.
2) Why does a reorg'ed transaction get announced 3 times? From what I understand it can get announced once for disconnected block, once for mempool entry. What's the third? It occurs a 4th time when included in a block(not added in test)
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
code review ACK 7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009
promag:
Code review ACK 7356292e1d7a44da8a2bd31c02c58d550bf38009.
Tree-SHA512: 573662429523fd6a1af23dd907117320bc68cb51a93fba9483c9a2160bdce51fb590fcd97bcd2b2751d543d5c1148efa4e22e1c3901144f882b990ed2b450038
3e730bf90aaf53c41ff3a778f6aac15d163d1c0c zmq: Fix due to invalid argument and multiple notifiers (João Barbosa)
Pull request description:
ZMQ initialization is interrupted if any notifier fails, and in that case all notifiers are destroyed. The notifier shutdown assumes that the initialization had occurred. This is not valid when there are multiple notifiers and any except the last fails to initialize.
Can be tested by running test/functional/interface_zmq.py from this branch with bitcoind from master.
Closes#17185.
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK 3e730bf90aaf53c41ff3a778f6aac15d163d1c0c, thanks for adding a test
Tree-SHA512: 5da710e97dcbaa94896d019e75162d470f6d381ee07c60e5b3e9db93d11e8f7ca9bf2c509efa4486199e88c96c3e720cc96b4e35b62725d4c7db8e8e9bf6e09d
72ae20fc142457a200278cb2fedc5e32a3766b58 tests: add sync_all to fix race condition in wallet groups test (Karl-Johan Alm)
Pull request description:
This most likely fixes#19749, the intermittent CI issues with wallet_groups.
This fix is also included in #19743.
Top commit has no ACKs.
Tree-SHA512: dd6ef7f89829483e2278191c21fe0912b51fd2187c10a0fa158339c5ab9f22d93b733ae10f17ef25d8b64f44e596e66dba8d7db5c009343472f422ce4cd67d8f
7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9 test: test the implicit avoid partial spends functionality (Karl-Johan Alm)
b82067bf696c53f22536f9ca2e51949c164f6b06 wallet: try -avoidpartialspends mode and use its result if fees are below threshold (Karl-Johan Alm)
Pull request description:
The `-avoidpartialspends` feature is normally disabled, as it may affect the optimal fee for payments. This PR introduces a new parameter `-maxapsfee` (max avoid partial spends fee) which acts on the following values:
* -1: disable partial spend avoidance completely (do not even try it)
* 0: only do partial spend avoidance if fees are the same or better as the regular coin selection
* 1..∞: use APS variant if the absolute fee difference is less than or equal to the max APS fee
For values other than -1, the code will now try partial spend avoidance once, and if that gives a value within the accepted range, it will use that.
Example: -maxapsfee=0.00001000 means the wallet will do regular coin select, APS coin select, and then pick AKS iff the absolute fee difference is <= 1000 satoshi.
Edit: updated this to reflect the fact we are now using a max fee.
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK 7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9
achow101:
ACK 7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9
jonatack:
ACK 7f13dfb58, code review, debug build, verified the test fails with `AssertionError: not(2 == 1)` for the number of vouts when `-maxapsfee=0.0001` is changed to 0, and verified the new logging with an added assertion.
meshcollider:
Code review ACK 7f13dfb587dd6a7a5b7dfbfe689ae0ce818fe5c9
Tree-SHA512: 475929df57f6191bb4e36bfbcad5a280a64bb0ecd8767b76cb2e44e2301235d0eb294a3f2fac5bbf15d35d7ecfba47acb2285feadb883c9ce31c08377e3afb3c
0cdf2a77ddfa1d53c6fbd830d557a3f20d7fc365 ci: add tsan debug symbols option (Russell Yanofsky)
9a2f12680b3f00a207f1cdd4e0c50a3c7613aefc ci: Add tsan suppression for race in DatabaseBatch (Hennadii Stepanov)
Pull request description:
Since #19325 was merged, the corresponding change in TSan suppression file gets required.
This PR is:
- an analogous to #19226 and #19450, and
- a temporary workaround for CI fail like https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5741795508224000?command=ci#L4993
ACKs for top commit:
MarcoFalke:
ACK 0cdf2a77ddfa1d53c6fbd830d557a3f20d7fc365
Tree-SHA512: 7832f143887c8a0df99dea03e00694621710378fbe923e3592185fcd3658546a590693b513abffc5ab96e9ef76c9c4bff3330eeee69a0c5dbe7574f34c417220
fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (rpcdump) (MarcoFalke)
fa32c1d5ec25bc53bf989a8ae68e688593d2859d rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (zmq) (MarcoFalke)
faaa46dc204d6d714f71dbc6f0bf02215dba0f0f rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (mining) (MarcoFalke)
fa93bc14c7411a108dd024d391344fabf0f76369 rpc: Remove unused return type from appendCommand (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr:
### Motivation
RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.
### Changes
The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`.
### Future work
> Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?
Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:
* Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
* Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
* Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
* Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
* Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
* Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static
### Bugs found
* The assert identified issue #18607
* The changes itself fixed bug #19250
ACKs for top commit:
fjahr:
tested ACK fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed
promag:
Code review ACK fa3d9ce3254882c545d700990fe8e9a678f31eed.
Tree-SHA512: 068ade4b55cc195868d53b7f9a27151d45b440857bb069e261a49d102a49a38fdba5d68868516a1d66a54a73ba34681362f934ded7349e894042bde873b75719
f0aa8aeea5a183ea44a877255d12db7732f2e0a8 test: add rpc_generate functional test (Jon Atack)
92d94ffb8d07cc0d2665c901de5903a3a90d5fd0 rpc: print useful help and error message for generate (Jon Atack)
8d32d2011d3f4e1d9e587d6f80dfa4a3e9f9393d test: consider generate covered in _get_uncovered_rpc_commands() (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This was a requested follow-up to #19133 and #17700 to alleviate confusion and head-scratching by people following tutorials that use `generate`. See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19455#issuecomment-668172916 below, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19133#issuecomment-636860943 and https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/17700#issuecomment-566159096.
before
```
$ bitcoin-cli help generate
help: unknown command: generate
$ bitcoin-cli generate
error code: -32601
error message:
Method not found
```
after
```
$ bitcoin-cli help generate
generate ( nblocks maxtries ) has been replaced by the -generate cli option. Refer to -help for more information.
$ bitcoin-cli generate
error code: -32601
error message:
generate ( nblocks maxtries ) has been replaced by the -generate cli option. Refer to -help for more information.
```
In the general help it remains hidden, as requested by laanwj.
```
$ bitcoin-cli help
== Generating ==
generateblock "output" ["rawtx/txid",...]
generatetoaddress nblocks "address" ( maxtries )
generatetodescriptor num_blocks "descriptor" ( maxtries )
```
ACKs for top commit:
adamjonas:
utACK f0aa8aeea5a183ea44a877255d12db7732f2e0a8
pinheadmz:
ACK f0aa8aeea5a183ea44a877255d12db7732f2e0a8
Tree-SHA512: d083652589ad3e8228c733455245001db22397559c3946e7e573cf9bd01c46e9e88b72d934728ec7f4361436ae4c74adb8f579670b09f479011924357e729af5
fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b rpc: Assert that RPCArg names are equal to CRPCCommand ones (misc) (MarcoFalke)
fa50bdc755489b2e291ea5ba0e39e44a20c6c6de rpc: Limit echo to 10 args (MarcoFalke)
fa89ca9b5bd334813fd7e7edb202c56b35076e8d refactor: Use C++11 range based for loops to simplify rpc code (MarcoFalke)
fa459bdc87bbb050ca1c8d469023a96ed798540e rpc: Treat all args after a hidden arg as hidden as well (MarcoFalke)
Pull request description:
This is split out from #18531 to just touch the RPC methods in misc. Description from the main pr:
### Motivation
RPCArg names in the rpc help are currently only used for documentation. However, in the future they could be used to teach the server the named arguments. Named arguments are currently registered by the `CRPCCommand`s and duplicate the RPCArg names from the documentation. This redundancy is fragile, and has lead to errors in the past (despite having linters to catch those kind of errors). See section "bugs found" for a list of bugs that have been found as a result of the changes here.
### Changes
The changes here add an assert in the `CRPCCommand` constructor that the RPCArg names are identical to the ones in the `CRPCCommand`.
### Future work
> Here or follow up, makes sense to also assert type of returned UniValue?
Sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. I am going to submit any further works as follow-ups, including:
* Removing the CRPCCommand arguments, now that they are asserted to be equal and thus redundant
* Removing all python regex linters on the args, now that RPCMan can be used to generate any output, including the cli.cpp table
* Auto-formatting and sanity checking the RPCExamples with RPCMan
* Checking passed-in json in self-check. Removing redundant checks
* Checking returned json against documentation to avoid regressions or false documentation
* Compile the RPC documentation at compile-time to ensure it doesn't change at runtime and is completely static
### Bugs found
* The assert identified issue #18607
* The changes itself fixed bug #19250
ACKs for top commit:
laanwj:
Code review ACK fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b
fjahr:
tested ACK fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b
theStack:
ACK fa77de2baa
ryanofsky:
Code review ACK fa77de2baa40ee828c850ef4068c76cc3619e87b. Pretty straightfoward changes
Tree-SHA512: badae1606518c0b55ce2c0bb9025d14f05556532375eb20fd6f3bfadae1e5e6568860bff8599d037e655bf1d23f1f464ca17f4db10a6ab3d502b6e9e61c7b3d3
9c54cb16de Merge #19405: rpc, cli: add network in/out connections to `getnetworkinfo` and `-getinfo` (Wladimir J. van der Laan)
19aba38cab Merge #19200: rpc: remove deprecated getaddressinfo fields (Samuel Dobson)
f5642281cc Merge #20282: wallet: change upgradewallet return type to be an object (Samuel Dobson)
Pull request description:
## Issue being fixed or feature implemented
Bitcoin backports with breaking changes
## What was done?
- bitcoin/bitcoin#20282
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19200
- bitcoin/bitcoin#19405
## How Has This Been Tested?
Run unit/functional tests
## Breaking Changes
### RPC:
- `upgradewallet` now returns object for future extensibility (#20282)
- `getnetworkinfo` now returns fields `connections_in`, `connections_out`,
`connections_mn_in`, `connections_mn_out`, `connections_mn`
that provide the number of inbound and outbound peer
connections. These new fields are in addition to the existing `connections`
field, which returns the total number of peer connections. Old fields
`inboundconnections`, `outboundconnections`, `inboundmnconnections`,
`outboundmnconnections` and `mnconnections` are removed (#19405)
- Backwards compatibility has been dropped for two `getaddressinfo` RPC
deprecations, as notified in the 19.1.0 and 19.2.0 release notes.
The deprecated `label` field has been removed as well as the deprecated `labels` behavior of
returning a JSON object containing `name` and `purpose` key-value pairs. Since
20.1, the `labels` field returns a JSON array of label names. (#19200)
### CLI
- The `connections` field of `bitcoin-cli -getinfo` is expanded to return a JSON
object with `in`, `out` and `total` numbers of peer connections and `mn_in`,
`mn_out` and `mn_total` numbers of verified mn connections. It previously
returned a single integer value for the total number of peer connections. (#19405)
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK 9c54cb16de
Tree-SHA512: 9710cdd062d02d64e2eebcecca1b5c2e6ccda5ca6d9bd6d1833700f4273fcfb206ae99134f71bbc8b0843cb8ebba208c72139f5a624d79ec7362bd73b117bfb2
581b343d5bf517510ab0236583ca96628751177d Add in/out connections to cli -getinfo (Jon Atack)
d9cc13e88d096c1a171159c01cbb96444f7f8d7f UNIX_EPOCH_TIME fixup in rpc getnettotals (Jon Atack)
1ab49b81cf32b6ef9e312a0a8ac45c68a3262f0d Add in/out connections to rpc getnetworkinfo (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
This is basic info that is present in the GUI that I've been wishing to have exposed via the RPC and CLI without needing a bash workaround or script. For human users it would also be useful to have it in `-getinfo`.
`bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo`
```
"connections": 15,
"connections_in": 6,
"connections_out": 9,
```
`bitcoin-cli -getinfo`
```
"connections": {
"in": 6,
"out": 9,
"total": 15
},
```
Update the tests, RPC help, and release notes for the changes. Also fixup the `getnettotals` timemillis help while touching `rpc/net.cpp`.
-----
Reviewers can manually test this PR by [building from source](https://jonatack.github.io/articles/how-to-compile-bitcoin-core-and-run-the-tests), launching bitcoind, and then running `bitcoin-cli -getinfo`, `bitcoin-cli getnetworkinfo`, `bitcoin-cli help getnetworkinfo`, and `bitcoin-cli help getnettotals` (for the UNIX epoch time change).
ACKs for top commit:
eriknylund:
> tACK [581b343](581b343d5b) on master at [a0a422c](a0a422c34c), ran unit & functional tests and and confirmed changes on an existing datadir ✌️
benthecarman:
tACK `581b343`
willcl-ark:
tACK for 581b343d5bf517510ab0236583ca96628751177d, this time rebased onto master at 862fde88be706adb20a211178253636442c3ae00.
shesek:
tACK `581b343`. This provides what I needed, thanks!
n-thumann:
tACK 581b343 on master at a0a422c, ran unit & functional tests and and confirmed changes on an existing datadir ✌️
Tree-SHA512: 08dd3ac8fefae401bd8253ff3ac027603c528eeccba53cedcb127771316173a7052fce44af8fa33ac98ebc4cf2a2b11cdefd949995d55e9b9a5942b876d00dc5
BACKPORT NOTICE:
These backports #17578 and #17585 are included to 19.1 and 19.2. That's long enough!
------------------------------------------
bc01f7ae0538d3c647ce8dfbc29f7914d5df3fbb doc: release note for rpc getaddressinfo removals (Jon Atack)
90e989390ee50633fff0e4f210a1ea23ff00e012 rpc: getaddressinfo RPCResult fixup (Jon Atack)
a8507c99da10791aa69ca277128e06753942e976 rpc: remove deprecated getaddressinfo `labels: purpose` (Jon Atack)
645a8653c895e4fc7717e9e5ac045612b5deaa60 rpc: remove deprecated getaddressinfo `label` field (Jon Atack)
Pull request description:
These were deprecated in #17578 and #17585, with expected 0.21 removal notified in the 0.20 release notes.
```
- The `getaddressinfo` RPC has had its `label` field deprecated
(re-enable for this release using the configuration parameter
`-deprecatedrpc=label`). The `labels` field is altered from returning
JSON objects to returning a JSON array of label names (re-enable
previous behavior for this release using the configuration parameter
`-deprecatedrpc=labelspurpose`). Backwards compatibility using the
deprecated configuration parameters is expected to be dropped in the
0.21 release. (#17585, #17578)
```
ACKs for top commit:
Sjors:
utACK bc01f7a
adamjonas:
utACK bc01f7a
meshcollider:
utACK bc01f7ae0538d3c647ce8dfbc29f7914d5df3fbb
Tree-SHA512: ae1af381e32c4c3bde8b061a56382838513a9a82c88767843cdeae3a2ab8aa7d8c2e66e106d2b31ea07d74bb80c191a2f842c9aaecc7c5438ad9a9bc66d1b251
a93de8690b refactor: s/governanceManager/govman/g (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
0aa08ba80d refactor: remove CGovernanceManager global, move to NodeContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
405b8c669a refactor: s/sporkManager/sporkman/g (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
60fd1aa774 refactor: remove CSporkManager global, move to NodeContext (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
24ba2f027c refactor: remove redundant condition check in `IsOldBudgetBlockValueValid` (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
e2405e67fb refactor: move MasternodePayments::* functions into helper class (Kittywhiskers Van Gogh)
Pull request description:
## Additional Information
* `PeerManager`'s initialization has been moved downwards (it used to be initialized _after_ `CGovernanceManager`) to now _after_ `CMasternodeSync`. This is to avoid having to pass `CSporkManager`'s `unique_ptr` container and instead pass the its dereferenced pointer.
* `CChainstateHelper` is just proxy for helper classes meant to hold references to managers that would be needed by functions that are called by `CChainState`. It's the alternative to passing every single manager into `CChainState` through `ChainstateManager`.
Instead, they're all bunched up via `CChainstateHelper` and is accessible to `CChainState` through passing it as an argument. For this reason, it should ideally initialized _after_ all relevant managers are setup but _before_ the chain is validated. We would want to avoid deferred dereferencing if we can help it.
* Internal/private functions have been marked as `[[nodiscard]]`.
## Breaking Changes
None. Changes are limited to refactoring, no logical changes have been made.
## Checklist:
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
- [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation **(note: N/A)**
- [x] I have assigned this pull request to a milestone _(for repository code-owners and collaborators only)_
ACKs for top commit:
PastaPastaPasta:
utACK a93de8690b
Tree-SHA512: b576ca61a94b86b8a6fa8909379d156ff902198b5824fcfb4665e5eb9d1d5e250db737f84a877de634a490146b82759c2350370903f430997423fd71142106d1
